McDonald v. State

The judgment of conviction and the enhanced sentence entered thereon are affirmed upon a holding that (1) the information charging burglary was not fatally defective for failure to allege non-consent, see State v. Hicks, 421 So.2d 510 (Fla.1982); (2) the proof with respect to ownership was sufficient, see In the Interest of M.E., 870 So.2d 795 (Fla.1979); Jones v. State, 415 So.2d 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Adirim v. State, 350 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); cert. denied, 365 So.2d 709 (Fla.1978); (3) the fingerprint evidence establishing the defendant’s presence was sufficient, see Sorey v.…